Struggling with car accident claim

boots_babe

Hi,

3 years ago I was in an accident. The insurance claim part has been settled, with another driver admitting full fault. However there is still an ongoing medical claim.

In short, I had severe pain in my lower back for several months after the accident, culminating in a period of many weeks where I could not even sit down as I was in such agony. I had a guided steroid injection under anaesthetic into my SI joint which was largely a miracle cure, I woke up a different person!

However I still have residual pain in the area, low level and nothing which prevents me doing anything. I also have what I'm told will be a permanently numb front left thigh.

DLG Legal have been horrific all through, I could write pages about the many errors and issues. Anyway, most recently I was asked to meet with (a) a pain management medical expert and (b) a spinal surgeon medical expert.

Spinal surgeon agrees with what I've said, that the accident caused the issues and that  I am now unlikely to improve further. 

Pain management person has somehow hooked onto mention in my medical notes of visiting a chiropractor in the mid 2000s, and says he thinks my pain was a pre-existing issue. I have pointed the pain management person at the specific page in my medical records (I had to send them a full SAR of medical records) which confirms that the chiropractor was in relation to NECK issues. Nothing to do with my back, and definitely not my lower back or SI joint.

The insurer has gone back to this medical person with that information but they are refusing to change their report, saying that this is 'their opinion'.

I understand that there is an element of opinion with something like this, but where there is a medical fact documented in my medical notes, which he is blatantly ignoring, this is NOT his opinion, it is factually incorrect.

My claims handler at DLG doesn't seem to know what to do, and I certainly don't having never gone through this before.

Surely it cannot be right that this expert is allowed to ignore the medical facts and override with an incorrect formal report? It is so frustrating as I have already had to fight to get exaggerated medical issues REMOVED from my claim as I am not willing to lie simply to strengthen my case, yet here I am faced with a lie being put into a key medical report which I'm told will have a big impact on the outcome.

Many thanks.

DullGreyGuy

These people are being engaged as independent expert witnesses, ultimately their opinion is their own and you cannot convince them to do otherwise else they are no longer independent. Those regularly involved in handling bodily injury cases will maintain a database of preferred witnesses and you can make your own assumptions as to what those doing claimant work and those doing defence work may consider preferential. 

At times you come across a new person thats not in the database and you have to somewhat suck it and see but people can fairly quickly make up an opinion which will potentially save future clients but doesnt help those that had to use them as an unknown quantity. 

Was the person a qualified doctor or some other expertise? You can follow the relevant complaints process depending on their specialty but the likes of the GMC for example will only deal with the doctor's fitness to practice so again is more about saving future patients/clients than really helping you. 

Ultimately DLG Legal should be providing advice, they should be escalating it if the fee earner is unsure as to what to do. There will be a complaints process for DLG Legal that you should use if the fee earner cannot give satisfactory advice and isnt willing to escalate. 

boots_babe

@DullGreyGuy thanks for replying. I suppose what I cannot understand at all, is how an actual documented fact, can be ignored, and someone can put forward a totally different opinion based on, well, nothing.

I of course understand that things like, what is the prognosis for recovery, is an opinion. And of course whether the pain and issues I've had are even caused by the car accident, is an opinion. 

But to fabricate something by saying that chiropractic treatment which is documented as being for a particular neck issue, was actually to do with a lower back SI joint issue, just seems plain wrong. Is that really alllowed?

I have to say I have found some shocking things through this process, that have made me realise how easily people can work the system to their advantage should they choose. Having played everything straight and honest, it seems deeply wrong that a medical fact that is shown on my medical records can just be completely rewritten into something untrue.